About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27
countries like china and russia, along with our traditional allies and a number of other states across the world have stepped up to impose the sanctions together. and you saw in the intervention in libya. we're not only our traditional european allies but our arab friends also stepped in to intervene in their own backyard. that is not leading from behind. that is leading in a way that enables others to step up, share the burdens, and be part of the solution. i think that, you know, this president has adopted a very strong and smart approach to the american leadership using all of the instruments of our national power. the military, when we must, but also much stronger on diplomacy, economic instruments and so forth. when it comes to defense and defense spending, i think this is a big difference between the two campaigns. this president has put forward a very, you know, a defense budget that is strategic in that sense it is driven by strategy but it's also driven by the legal constraints of the law that has been put in place, the budget control act those passed by a bipartisan majority
note just in passing that my wife's father, my father-in-law was born in russia, emigrated to the united states, like the rabbi and senator kohl's father. mr. president, it took four months but the republicans will finally realizing their way back from the fiscal cliff has been right in front of them all along. in july the senate passed legislation to give economic certainty to 98% of american families and to small businesses, to every american making less than $250,000 a year. for four months we've been one vote away for from a solution to this looming crisis. they've held the middle-class hostage to protect the richest 2% of taxpayers, people who enjoyed a decade of ballooning income and shrinking tax bills. one has to admire the president, who went out and campaigned on this issue. he didn't -- he didn't in any way walk away from the issue. he said that's how we're going to get our fiscal house in order. and independents by a huge margin, democrats by a huge margin, and 41e% of republicans support what the president asked us to do. now, reasonable republicans are coming
to their estimates, will overtake saudi arabia and russia as the world's top oil producer by 02017. beneficiary by 2017. the i.e.a. chief economist told a news conference in london that he believed the united states would overtake russia as the biggest gas producer by a significant margin by 2015 and by 2017 would become the world's largest oil producer producer. will this prediction hold out? i don't know. but are we on our way towards significant gains in terms of our energy independence? yes, we are. the language in section 313, which this amendment proposes to strike -- i want to be very clear about this -- does not affect programs that have been discussed here in such areas as hydrogen fuel as a fuel of choice for engine design or doing away with r&d dollars. it is just not true. it states in part that this restriction goes to the cost of producing or purchasing alter national fuels if they exceed the cost of producing traditional fossil fuel that would be used for the same purpose -- that's very narrowly defined. there is a second paragraph in section 313 that goes to an exception to this
.s. intelligence has identified three command and control servers. one is in russia and one in the states that are sending commands to this virus and the u.s. intelligence has now at a later concluded with a high degree of confidence that this virus was developed by state-sponsored actors in excess land, and not in the high degree of confidence that there is a shadow out there that they have another target and that this virus is not going to stay on the leal companies that could move -- oil companies that could move. if you want to start? >> i think so, given the "washington post" sources we don't have to worry about. [laughter] but now i think one, the general realization that we have not seen everything yet sold, second, typical of the cyber type of activities they are probably most crippling in undermining confidence over the public so they need courses of action to address this in the public and how they will do this we haven't really gotten the sense of the external overseas type of the implications from the standpoint of other damage out there. we need to know from the intelligence
be effective adversely. the dependence of europe and russia and is that necessary? secondly, ongoing arrangements generated over the last two or three decades, largely by an american strategy designed to diminish your independence in russian energy. i play the general rule in georgia and providing access in the near future, is something that i'm sure some russians would like to undercut. so even without a massive outbreak of violence in the region and escalating clinton's and explosions, that would have consequences. very adverse to europe and to the united states. these partners in the negotiating process are motivated the same way as we are, on the part of some individuals, i'm not saying this is the official russian point of view, but some individuals in russia were strategists and might take themselves that we are really sure [inaudible] two that's interesting but let me play devil's advocate for a second. containment, in essence, it's on the brink of war. when the russians were those who may have different interest still be able to achieve some of those objectives when it comes
korea, north korea, russia and japan all have leadership succession or elections during that year. it inevitably makes the top leaders focused inward on leadership issues, very unwilling to appear to be in any way weak abroad and so forth. 2013 is the opposite. you would expect the new leaders knowing they have to deal with each other for years to come potentially have a more positive agenda looking forward. how do we build something that's not going to impose high costs is and have few benefits? every one of those leaders has enormous domestic problems that they have to confront, and they want some more space to pursue that. so i think there's an underlying, you know, the kind of underlying tectonic plates are moving at a somewhat different direction in 2013. obviously, specific events can throw that out of whack, and if you look at the details, they're pretty tough. on xi personally, you know, he has evinced some, you know, he has some exposure to the u.s., he seems to enjoy being here when he's been here, he has good relations with vice president biden and so forth. he seems to
to criticize that just because want to see a wider solution. >> in light of the blocking that russia and china has taken against syria have that actually contribute any money to the humanitarian crisis that now exist in syria? >> i think occupation from russia and china have been very small. i will have to write to the honorable lady with details about the. they are not so large that have been committed in my mind, let us put it that way. we will encourage, i have encouraged before russia to make a contribution to those u.n. funds, but the biggest contribution, the biggest occupation comes from the states emphatically from the european union, third from the united kingdom. and, of course, we are also contributing the european union money. so the backing for these things is very heavily western as things stand. >> i know the foreign secretary said he didn't want to debate about the portion it or proportion. but while he is right to condemn militant rocket attacks would not also condemn the loss of innocent lives, particularly children? and with respect to both the u.n., is he out to be convince
critical level. this here comment usaid was booted out of russia initially when i went there to help the russian people, one of the first things they did with the help of the russians to two extreme poverty. my question is, is the risk too much for us so that we would basically go winhelp the nation and state thank you and don't let the door hit you on the way out? thank you. >> first of all, the indonesian case, part of that is just cultural. they are far more sensitive to questions of faith than we are. so it's not infrequent that we would behave in a way that doesn't take into account adequately their cultural sensitivities. but this happens all the time in life and i think you have to ask yourself what's the right thing to do and you try and do it. if you make your very best effort and someone isn't appreciative, you didn't do anything wrong. don't worry about it. and sometimes that happens. i wouldn't hesitate to help people because someone related to a recipient is resentful that they weren't helped by their own kind. i would want to help. >> if i could have something to the in
in the russians had behaved, i don't think we can give up on russia because they do know the syrian military there in getting bashar al-assad out of the country is not going to solve all the problems. if he leaves, particularly if he were to leave tomorrow, let's say, you would have fragmentation in syria for both sides this is an existential struggle. and alawite dominated army is not going to give up because bashar gave up. and the competition is not going to lay down their arms because bashar less. so i think we very much, if there's going to be any hope for resolution that keeps syria impact for the time being we need the russians, and we need putin, and we need them to recognize that their nihilistic attitude right now doesn't play well. and i would suggest that a number of countries might do better by putting pressure on russia rather than excoriating the united states. i do believe in military intervention. i think we could very well find ourselves backing one side and then only to find that we're incapable of stopping them from occurring the other side if they defeat them. we've seen
of russia initially when they went there to help the russian people, one of the first things they did with the help of the russians to two extreme poverty. my question is, is a risk too much for us so that we would a sickly state thank you and to let the door his shoe on the way out. >> obviously an indonesian case, part of that is just their farm are sensitive to questions of faith and we are so it's not infrequent we would behave in a way that doesn't take into account adequately their cultural sensitivities. this happens all the time and life. what's the right thing to do if someone isn't appreciative you didn't do anything wrong. don't worry about it and sometimes that happens. i wouldn't hesitate to help people unless someone related to the recipient weren't helped by their own kind. i would like to help. >> and i could add something to the indonesian case, there's a thing that exacerbated the relationship that made us were challenging for the ambassador. i'm sure we were still there when he was president wesley had a a policy decision here in the u.s. regarding the military enga
to end up like russia. there are thousands of family in cincinnati that have led from socialism. if we have obama as president socialism will be in the united states. host: less of a map to get a sense of where the candidates have been. -- let's look at a map to get a sense of where the candidates have been. all the candidates have been crisscrossing ohio. the other battleground states colorado, iowa, and now wisconsin. minnesota is in play. a romney in pennsylvania. the states of getting the most attention since the party conventions. they have been traveling to a total of 10 states. later this afternoon we will have live coverage of bombing donald. he will be joined by two of the romney sons. they are in virginia. good afternoon. caller: hello. i voted for obama because i am highly impressed with his leadership and the leadership he has shown throughout his administration. i am also impressed with his vice-president mr. joe biden. they work together as a team. we need to finish what we started. i also enjoyed listening to mr. biden's comment today about mitt romney. he said mitt romn
in power and maintain control over at least part of syria and that of course is russia and iran and the result would be al-assad steven pour and the victory which is not going to be good for our simultaneous efforts to try to move iran to the negotiating table to seize the nuclear weapons, and in white portions of syria, a no-man's land rather like the fata of somalia where the militants perhaps probably associated with al qaeda would find a new home. we already see some of this. this is another reason why the administration needs to engage in putting in beijing through military means if necessary the merkley or indirectly through providing weapons and things like no-fly zones. we need to do more and we need to do more urgently or this is great to slip out of control. at best -- and it isn't very good at sifry at salles -- at worst we are going to see any emerging sunni shia fisher across the middle east would be followed by violence and fighting in iraq and elsewhere. let me touch on iraq. it hasn't received too much commentary either in the debates in the campaign or even some
that are of concern to the u.s.. when you look at the consequences for russia, i mean this is not just a regional question. it is about the relationship with another superpower with the u.n.. it's interesting, i am sure that a good percentage of the people here, when bush asked to go to war in iraq without a resolution we are very uncomfortable asking without the resolution and yet we find people now saying maybe obama should do it but for different reasons. i think it's a really big problem for the administration. it's not tied to the election. i think the elections and themselves have problems. >> actually a cautious approach example. >> let me say i agree 100%. don't get me wrong. i don't think us going in and invading, either way there are going to be these perceptions along with the perception of the positive images of the west i was helping syria is by no means going to change the perceptions that we help some countries because of resources versus others. i agree with that 100%. >> i think there's a growing trend in kind -- inside of washington to favor intervention in syria, some kind of
. they did it with me first and then the israeli embassy in russia's refusal, the chinese refusal. it was an interesting experience . thank you pay much for inviting me. >> governor sununu. >> like to just add something to with the speaker has just pointed out. the climate really was different at that time. this is not a big piece of legislation we were very hard on on a bipartisan atheist. we passed the clean air bill, which had been languishing for over a decade. we passed an americans with disabilities, which is extremely difficult. we passed the civil rights bill. said there was a precedent in terms of cooperation and climate. as representatives obey pointed out later on, that is manifested in what was brilliant on precedented interaction between the white house and congress on dealing the invasion to kuwait and tried to pull together a unified respect you. it was an accidental. i really believe we work awfully hard in order to maintain. the keyword was the fact that tom foley and president bush have been members of congress to get there. they had developed a personal relation
, it was launched by iranian sources. we know that iran, russia and china are extremely active in probing our cyber systems, including those that control our critical infrastructure. not only our financial systems, our transportation systems, our water treatment plants, but also our electric grid. recently, we have seen what hurricane sandy, the superstorm, has done to states, so many states, destroying lives and property and leaving people without power for days on end. well, multiply that many times, mr. president, if it were a deliberate cyber attack that knocked out the electric grid along the entire east coast. that's what we're talking about. that is the kind of risk that calls us to act. we have heard from the experts over and over again that this vulnerability is huge and escalating. we know that the number of cyber attacks that have been reported to the department of homeland security has increased by 200% in just the last year. and those are just the -- the attacks that have been reported. that's just the tip of the iceberg. undoubtedly, there are many more on our critical infrastructure
be highly desirable to find a way to bring russia to work out a deal for us to say no, no, no i just want to make the point that as wonderful as all the modern tools are they will not allow us to just tools to consult the situations and i think the moment is here. it is over dewey and extremely urgent to try to find a way that will end the killing and syria not only because of israel and other countries in the region but because it sets a - example to other bad guys in the region and elsewhere who will be encouraged that they can get away with these types of behavior if we don't act so this is a huge challenge we have to face even is not a military solution, it is a smart diplomacy. >> we have to wrap up pretty soon but let me take two more comments from here and there. yes. >> thank you very much. my name is luis. i'm afraid i'm standing in for life defense secretary. i just want to make a point after having had a long period of being a diplomatic practitioner particularly in my part of the world in the china, asia, jakarta, they have some good news which i would like to throw in. there
alter u.s.-china russia confrontation such as the situation in gaza. a three-way relationship on beijing, washington and taipei is positive and quiet, as quiet as it's been over two decades. since that's the only issue on which there is any realistic prospect of armed conflict, and that is small thing. fifth, territorial disputes in the south china sea and east china sea are in my view the most troubling development. chinese confrontation with u.s. treaty allies, principally with japan create serious tensions and introduce unpredictability in the u.s.-china chip as well as offering an image of china's rise is unsettling to countries well beyond concerned rivals. finally, military deployments on both sides. i won't discuss those because i believe jonathan, jonathan pollack will do so in depth in his presentation. what do we expect them president obama's second term and she champagnes first. the main variable and the relationship is china. president obama has had for years to formulate and put in place an approach towards china. in broad terms it is consistent with that of his predecessor
box there, bar is the aggregate of all of our potential challenger states including china and russia. it is a four to one advantage that we presently enjoy. if we rolled back to the cold war period, what you would see instead is the purple bar and the adversary bar were about equal. so what we've done is we've established over the past 20 years, we've established a four to one advantage in spending over our principal, um, and potential military competitors. when we hear that we can't reduce spending by 13%, what we're actually saying is that having a four to one advantage is not sufficient to allow a 13% rollback. this is the slide you saw initially, um, and again, it illustrates how national defense budget authority has changed over the past 60 years. at the very end of that slide, you'll see this purple line. that, the difference between these two illustrates what sequestration would do to the military. it is true that there's something of a cliff there. there's a cliff anyway, and that's in part because this chart does not take into account future war spending. we don't know what
wrapping up today, working on a bill to normalize trade relations with russia. this is live senate coverage on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the clerk will read a communication to the senate. the clerk: washington, d.c., november 16, 2012. to the senate: under the provisions of rule 1, paragraph 3, of the standing rules of the senate, i hereby appoint the honorable christopher a. coons, a senator from the state of delaware, to perform the duties of the chair. signed: daniel k. inouye, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the senate stands adjourned until 12:00 p.m. on tuesday, november 20, 2012. adjourn: >> the senate meets next tuesday at an eastern but it will be another pro forma session during the thanksgiving holiday break. senators return for legislative work after the holiday, monday november 26 if they were resumed consideration of the sportsman's bill expanding hunting and fishing on federal land it will take you back to the peterson foundation forum on what's called the fiscal cliff. members of congress are discu
at the expenditures and the resources by china, by russia, by others -- >> uh-huh.. >> -- and what for them is one of their biggest concerns? well, it's the u.s. and not only national security secrets, but increasingly commercial secrets. much of that which can be gleaned or stolen from cyberspace. and it's a dire threat. and i think that in part because so much of our intention, so much of our resources were spent in the counterterrorism arena, we've forgotten the necessity of old-fashioned counterintelligence. and that's an important element of this. a big one. >> often i've heard some people have been involved in counterintelligence say it tends to be seen as a little bit of the red-headed stepchild in the intelligence world. >> uh-huh. >> why is it that when we need it, and what's the cure for it? >> i think in part because it's something we don't want to think about. it's very unpleasant to think that our agencies or our businesses have been penetrated by a foreign power, by a criminal organization, and we'd rather think about, well, how do we achieve that goal, a foreign policy goal or a pro
keep us reliant on foreign oil from -- let's just list the countries, madam president -- russia, venezuela, iraq, saudi arabia. i mentioned iran. it's poorly drafted and damaging to our security. instead, we have got an opportunity today to help our military and our country. this is how we move forward. this isn't about an environmental agenda or some kind of a green conspiracy. it's about doing the right thing, supporting our military brass and establishing a stronger national security and energy security posture in the years ahead. i urge my colleagues to support my amendment to strike section 313. mr. president, as i conclude, i would ask for unanimous consent that senators gillibrand and tom udall be added to my amendment, number 2985 to s. 3254. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. udall: thank you, mr. president. i would yield the floor to my colleague from oklahoma. mr. inhofe: it's my understanding the senator has a timing thing which he would like to have five minutes before my time begins. that's acceptable. first i would look to ask unanimous consent that cap
with russia and mull doe v.a. the house has a public hearing later this week on the libya attack, and house republican leaders will also be going to the white house on friday. house democratic leader nancy pelosi joins steve israel to introduce a new house democrat, new house democrats who were elected this month. these members will take office in january, and c-span is scheduled to cover this briefing live at 2 eastern right after the house gavels out. >> c-span invites middle and high school students to send a message to the president through a short video. let president obama know what's the most important issue he should consider in 2013 for a chance to win the grand prize of $5,000. c-span's student cam video competition is open to students grades 6-12, and the deadline is january 18, 2013. go online to studentcam.org. >> what i like about c pan's coverage is -- c-span's coverage is it's in depth. often times you'll cover an event from start to finish, and i can get the information that i need. i like to watch "the communicators," i like to watch congressional hearings. the events that
, first and foremost with a 49 capitals of the coalition. i also think the other capitals, iran, russia, china, all the countries that have interest in afghanistan. their calculus would be affected by signing a bilateral security agreement. more important, signing an agreement reflecting the commitment that was initially made in may 2012. >> i think it's a very important answer, and i have the same feeling, i think islamabad is the first couple that we affected by the pilots who could agreement, the whole argument refer to that part of the reason they continue to be tied to some elements of the pakistani government to terrorist groups like haqqani network and haqqani network and i is eyes, as they're hedging their bets for what happened the day after we leave if we're not leaving. presumably. they lose that argument. but there is, every situation is different, i can't help but relate this to iraq, that it seemed to me that nobody wanted our discussions with the iraqi government for our presence in iraq after our troops left to fail more than iran did. in fact, they were working on that,
be there beyond i had in mind, senator, first and, russia, china, all the calculus would be affected by a signing a bilateral security agreement. more importantly, signing an agreement reflecting well. >> i is and the others, i can't help it seems to me that they we have no continuing presence in iraq, nothing are warnings to what you were called for. which is to have a much smaller, me >> the leadership is that the afghan government is favorably disposed in a bilateral security agreement. clearly, the details both governments have come to both appear to be cautious and optimistic that we will be able to very. >> isn't keeping senator, i have i assessments my first question is do know what the command in that is interesting to me. a guy that's going to take over the command you had no impressions or ideas as to whether a troop drawdown issue between now and 2014? >> senator, have an understanding of framework in which that decision ought to be made. i certainly have identified the important burials that need to be made. i have not been involved in the detailed planning map so you are a blank slat
with disabilities act was adopted, we had people from many countries come here. i can think of both first russia, then it was greece, ireland, great britain, a number of other countries came here to learn what we had done and then to pick it up and move forward in their own countries. our legal framework influenced the substance of the convention and is informing its implementation in the 125 countries, i think, that has signed the -- that has ratified it along with the european union. my staff was involved in 2002 when the u.n. first broached this subject of coming up with a convention, and in turn provided to them the substance of the americans with disabilities act, its history, its provisions and what had been done from its adoption in 1990 until 2002, and the changes that it had brought about in our own country. so really, the americans with disabilities act really informed and laid the basis for what the u.n. began to do in 2002 and completed in 2006. so again, i'm very grateful to the leadership of senator kerry, senator mccain, also senator dole who i know is -- is not able to be with us
that the administration shall brief the appropriate committees on the dialogue between the united states and russia on issues related to or limits on or controls on nuclear arms, missile defense systems or long-range conventional strike systems. i think it's the administration's interest to consult with the congress and keep us adequately briefed on these discussions because they could, of course, eventually lead to an agreement which might then require the advice and consent of the senate. i note former senator arthur vandenberg once said if i'm going to be on the crash landing, i want to be on the takeoff. meaning it's much easier for the administration to obtain our consent if they seek our advice during the consultation process. i will confess this amendment was prompted by recent press stories, including one on november 8 which reported that our ambassador to russia, michael mcfall, said, and i quote -- "president obama would like to have a serious conversation with president putin about a further round of reductions in nuclear weapons to build on the new start treaty." end of quote. and i con
will work today on a measure to normalize u.s. trade relations with russia. you can see that debate starting at noon eastern over on c-span. now live to the senate floor here on c-span2. the presiding officer: the senate will come to order. the chaplain, dr. barry black, will lead the senate in prayer. the chaplain: let us pray. eternal lord god, today let your favor rest upon the members of our government's legislative branch. establish the works of their hands and strengthen them to honor you by serving others. let your life-giving spirit move them to feel greater compassion for those in need. use them to remove barriers that divide us, may they strive to be agents of healing and hope, as they help us all live in greater justice and peace. we pray in your holy name. amen. the presiding officer: please join me in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag. i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the presiding officer: the clerk will read a communication
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27